Want a Ruger MK Series Pistol

[Big D]

Hey yall. I have wanted a Ruger MK series pistol as long as I could remember. I currently have no .22 pistol, and have a hankering for one pretty bad. I am not picky as to whether it is a MK I, II, or III model, but it would be nice to have the bolt hold open feature. I have found several nice MKI Rugers on Gunbroker in the low to mid $200 price range, but I could get a brand new MKIII Standard for $303 OTD @ my local shop. But can not make up my mind whether I want the 4.75'' or 6'' barrel. Could yall please give me some pros and cons of each and what yall prefer? Any advice and insight would be greatly appreciated!

 

[mstrat]

Personally I like the lonnnng barrels for plinking, since the larger sight radius helps me shoot a little better at greater distances.

Since a .22 only acts as a range gun for me, its larger size doesn't matter in the least.

So in short - I have no reason NOT to get a nice long barrel (except when you run across an outstanding deal on one that happens to have a shorter barrel).

 

[sakata8242]

I have a MK III with a 5" bull barrel and enjoy it a lot. A lot of folks aren't huge fans of the MK III because of its "lawyer features" (LCI and magazine disconnect), but in terms of function and field stripping for cleaning, these additions have not been an issue for me.

The MK III has the "American style" magazine release(which I prefer), while the MK I and II have the euro-style release on the butt of the grip.

If you can find a used MK II Target or Hunter in good condition that might be a better deal than a new MK III Standard.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I have a MK III with a 5" bull barrel and enjoy it a lot.

The 5" bull barrel would be my choice. I find them to hold better and the adjustable sights are a plus.

 

[bannockburn]

I've tried several different barrel lengths with my Ruger .22's. I always come back to the 5.5" bull barrel model. Just seems to have the best sight radius and balance for my needs.

 

[bannockburn]

delete

 

[mbopp]

I have a MKI and find the 6-7/8" barrel a bit "whippy", it just doesn't settle down in my hand. If I were looking for another one it would be a 5-1/2" MKII. And then add the VQ trigger and sear, and maybe the Clark hammer pin.

 

[Bill B.]

To me the best of the bunch is the Ruger MK II and the one I would like to own the most is the 4" barrel target version. They were made in limited numbers in both stainless and blue and I have yet to find one at a price I can afford. The most affordable target version is the 5 1/2 in. bull version again available in stainless or blue and are available used for around $350.00 average. Hard to do better on a .22 auto IMO!

 

[wnycollector]

I'm a very happy owner of a standard barrel 6" MKIII. I had it at the range this past weekend and put 525 rounds through it at ranges from 15 to 25 yards. It is just a wonderful pistol to spend a day and a brick of ammo with

 

[forindooruseonly]

I have a MK II with the 6 - 7/8ths barrel. It shoots well enough, but I am surprised by the size of it every time I take it out. It is actually a pretty big gun. I'd like to have a 5 inch bull barrel one to try.

 

[smallbore]

I have 2 Ruger .22's. One is a stainless MkII comp target model (range/hunting) and the other a MkIII 22/45 w/short slab-sided bbl (all around fun).

 

[Red Cent]

I would vote for the "Gov't Target Model" with 5" bull barrel MKIII. I removed the magazine safety and there is a difference in trigger pull. I preferred the 1911style mag release. It balances very well in the hand. I got mine for Ruger Rimfire Competition.

 

[jdc1244]

I scoped my MK III with a 5" bull barrel, remarkably accurate and a joy to use – it’s the one to get.

 

[Dentite]

Another vote for 5.5" bull barrel. I just like the looks and balance of it. Mine happens to be a 22/45 Mark III.

 

[GLOOB]

I have a 5.5" BB version. If I got a second one, I'd opt for a skinny 4". The 5.5" is almost no fun to shoot. Every time I fire it, I'm compelled to dump the mag as fast as I can pull the trigger (oftentimes into a sub 1" group at 30 feet). And I have 5 mags and a McCormick speed loader, so I'm not really saving much money by shooting it over my 9mm.

 

[dewalt-2]

I have an old Standard that I restored from a rust bucket, and a MK III Target BB that I tweaked with VQ internals. Both are a joy to shoot. Have a look at them all and pick the one that suits you...

 

[Pilot]

Another vote for the MK II in 5.5 bull barrel configuration. I have two of them and they are great shooters. One has some VQ internals that help a bit, but they are fine stock. I also have a MK II Standard (Anniversary Model) and a MK II 22/45 4 inch bull barrel which is my hiking/woods/plinker.

They all are accurate and reliable. I see no need for the MK III and its LCI and mag disconnect. If you have to buy one of these there are simple ways to disable both useless features which can harm reliability.

 

[oldfool]

they all good
just pick 'em up, hold 'em in your own hand
one or another will sing to you

I like the 6 7/8" MKIII, sight radius for slow fire
the MKII 10" bull barrel for BR on sandbag target shooting
but would like to add a 5.5" bull barrel for rapid fire offhand
(always admired Buckmarks, but MKs sing my melody)

 

[Water-Man]

And another vote for the MK II 5.5" Target s/s.

 

[Shadan7]

Yeah, I think you'd be hard pressed to make a bad decision, no matter which model of barrel length you pick. I can say that my Mark I with the 5.5" BB has never failed to impress friends with how easily it shoots, and how accurately.

So, pick one and enjoy!

Jim